About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)
less agree with the democratic controlled senate in harry reid. politically, finding the consensus to do it, there is an acceptance around the capital that if an agreement is going to be reached, it will have to be like the fiscal cliff deal was, like the transportation bill was. speaker boehner has to pass it with a lot of democratic votes. that is a politically risky thing to do. in the crisis will lead him to do it. getting a majority of republicans to vote for a deal that can also be agreed to with 60 votes in the senate, there is no way to do it right now. host: todd zwillich is a reporter on capitol hill. lesley clark spends much of her time at the white house for mcclatchy newspapers. we will focus on sequestration and we will break it down topic by topic. later in the week, we will look housing and education issues. we hope you tune in all week as we provide more specific details on what will happen and how it could potentially impact you. let me go back to bob woodward. it is one of the opinion pages driving the day. he says the president and jack lew have this wrong. thes
, and the reason why it was 58 votes is because harry reid switched his vote to no soap the senate can bring it back up again. you have a lot of republican senators who were saying last week that they did not want to see it go up in filibuster. at least it would be an up-down of the to be approved. there was no precedent to filibuster a choice like this. and the republicans decided they wanted to use this vote as a way to extract more information from the white house on issues like the terrorist attack in benghazi in september, and so they are committed to passing a goal when they come back. the way you are looking at it, it is a tedious exercise in delaying the inevitable. chuck hagel will be confirmed. he will just have to wait 11 days. you should confirm him because you are going to confirm him anyway. it is just another delay in what the senate is trying to do. host: harry reid set a new vote for tuesday, in 11 days. what do republicans want to see in the meantime? guest: they say they would like answers again from the white house, more details about what the president did and did not do
a budget by the first monday of february. senator harry reid said the gun legislation in the senate will include magazine size and background checks, but it would not seek a ban on military-style assault weapons. an amendment could be included to cover that. the president heads to minneapolis to discuss gun control. and the cost of the 2012 elections are in. the final price tag is estimated at $7 billion. according to the consumer confidence index, half the respondents said that the financial crisis went under the labour retirement plan. we are interested in hearing from you if the financial crisis delay your retirement. want to give us a call, the numbers are on your screen. for republicans, 202-585-3881. for democrats, 202-585-3880. for independents, 202-585-3882. if you want to reach out to us on social media, you can send us a tweet at twitter.com/c-spanwj. around 40 people so far responding on facebook. and you can send us an e-mail to journal@c-span.org. the survey that was mentioned talks a little bit about respondents' and what they were asked about as far as their retiremen
a balanced budget amendment the kind of things that endear people in the republican primary voter. and harry reid spent more money than any of the other candidates in order to get the weakest republican into the general election knowing that they had a very difficult uphill fight in missouri and sure enough they got the weakest candidate and he blew himself up with the infamous current about illegitimate rape. >> you say it is to put in more quote electable candidates. the conservative wing of the republican party says the most eledgable is the most moderate and that is not necessarily the people they want to see running for office. >> lock, look, looking, look, look, look, let's be clear about this. cross roads support for tea party candidates. we are the largest financial backers of tea party candidates for the senate and the house. we spent over $30 million for tea party senate candidate. over $25 million for house candidates. $2.9 million for marco rubio. more than any other group in the general election. $2.7 million for rand paul. $8 million in colorado for ken buck. $5.1 million in ne
, " press here for a message from senator king." [laughter] the bad news is, it was in harry reid's handwriting. [laughter] listen, the message is really simple. we have got to start talking to each other, solving problems, we have got to get rid of the ideology and you have got to be fired up to make it happen. the forces of division are fired up. the forces that want to pull us apart and put us into categories are fired up. there has to be support for people who want to solve problems, who want to tell the truth, who want to work a five- day week, who want to do the things that we need to do to get this country going. it is what is on the minds of the public. i was the only candidate in the country where people had a real choice. if you stop and think about it, your choices are determined by the parties by large. in maine, people had a third choice. my favorite comment from the whole state was that people came up to me and said all my life, i wanted a chance to vote for none of the above. and you are it. [laughter] [applause] but the point is, people are more interested in solvi
john boehner talking to the president or mitch mcconnell talking to the vice president or harry reid, there's a few people at the top trying to make these decisions thinking we should all fall. there's little reach the bottom to find out where we are coming from and it's based on seniority. that hasn't worked well. we haven't been able to fix much with that type of attitude so i know when we reach out and have 25, 30 of us and we are reaching across the aisle malae -- i will give you a perfect example. we had a problem with revenue and people said we don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. we have people on the other side saying we don't spending problem, we have a revenue problem. they are both right and they are both wrong. how do we get people on the other side if a republican says i don't want any more revenue but they said it might not be that it's just i don't like the way that you spend the money and the democrats say okay. can we come to an agreement? if we vote to have revenue and also you are asking me as a democrat if we have new revenue can you spend it
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)